U.S. BUNKERS:

February 26, 2003 1:05 PM

U.S. BUNKERS: Life assurance, not life insurance. If you lack faith in duct tape and plastic sheeting, perhaps this is the solution for you.
posted by aladfar (9 comments total)

Oh.. I can't decide between the desert camouflage or the US flag paint scheme...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 1:14 PM on February 26, 2003

Personal bunkers should not be an option on peoples lists, they should be mandatory like in Switzerland...

what do the swiss know?
posted by birdherder at 1:28 PM on February 26, 2003

"uses: ... Booby Trapped Trojan Horse"


um, yeah...
posted by Mark Doner at 1:30 PM on February 26, 2003

Um, couldn't you have just talked about this yesterday?
posted by Pollomacho at 2:06 PM on February 26, 2003

Um, couldn't you have just talked about this yesterday?

No, because Dave Barry only talked about it today.
posted by KnitWit at 2:32 PM on February 26, 2003

Their syntax gives me a headache.
posted by rotifer at 2:32 PM on February 26, 2003

Did Roger Dean and the Monolithic Dome people get in on this design?
posted by Shane at 2:45 PM on February 26, 2003

Having posted a copy of this from here to elsewhere I got this response:

I must admit to a slight titter, a couple of years back, when the anti-nuclear, civil defence bunker in Hull had to be closed down due to vandalism.

I love that. Protects local government from anything the Sovs could throw at it up to but not including a thirteen year old boy with a magic marker.
posted by vbfg at 4:21 PM on February 26, 2003

The problem with bunkers is that they are static. They don't have legs: they can't just get up and walk away from a too-powerfull threat.

That's why I'm buying up a small surplus submarine and equipping it with wings. You've got to cover all the bases.
posted by troutfishing at 4:37 AM on February 27, 2003